oly 12mm vs panny 20mm?

I'm in a bind of weather to sell my panasonic 20mm f1.7 and get an olympus 12mm f2.0 lens. I really love the 20mm primary because of the sharpness and great for low light. But with the 12mm, i would get a wider angle and as for as i'm reading from the reviews, it's a higher grade lens for m43. Any suggestions?

Seriously, the FOV is so different no one could answer that question! Tell us more about what you want the lens for? What other lenses do you have? The cosmetics, including size, etc. are very different - is that important to you? Is focus noise/speed and issue for you? The Oly is much quieter/faster.

The actual sharpness/contrast, etc of each is lens is so close as to be academic - you're unlikely to see a difference.

I have the 20mm, had the 12mm, sent it back and bought the 14mm. Do I still lust after the 12? Yes! If I had unlimited funds, I'd have the 12/25/45 prime line-up. But I don't.

When I recently jumped in to the M4/3 pool, I picked up the Pana 20mm and the Oly 12mm. This may be more of a function of me needing to figure out how to shoot wide angle, but the 20mm rarely leaves my camera. Both great lenses, though, I think the 20mm is a better all-rounder.

I have both, and the 20 is the mainstay for everyday shooting. When I shoot landscapes, architecture, rooms, places etc., then the 12mm dominates. The 20mm is the clear workhorse for me. Perhaps think about the 25mm Summilux coming out?

Seriously, the FOV is so different no one could answer that question! Tell us more about what you want the lens for? What other lenses do you have? The cosmetics, including size, etc. are very different - is that important to you? Is focus noise/speed and issue for you? The Oly is much quieter/faster.

The actual sharpness/contrast, etc of each is lens is so close as to be academic - yu're unlikely to see a difference.

I have the 20mm, had the 12mm, sent it back and bought the 14mm. Do I still lust after the 12? Yes! If I had unlimited funds, I'd have the 12/25/45 prime line-up. But I don't.

Would be happy to comment further with more info...

Click to expand...

My primarily reason is to take landscape photos which the 12mm may be best. But of course with the price, would it be worth the money in the long run? The size does not matter with, neither the noise from my pany, but i do like a quiter and faster AF. Plus i also shoot during the evening.

The previous comments are right its very hard to compare the 12mm to the 20mm, especially when you consider field of view, your really comparing a 24mm with a 40mm (35mm equivalent) that a huge difference!
For everyday shooting I myself use the 20mm its very fast and a really nice lens, I don't doubt that the 12mm is also an excellent lens both in optical and build quality but it does come with a price!

I probably wouldn't use a 12mm as an everyday lens, as you say its better for landscape, rooms, etc as a wide angle rather than an everyday lens like the 20mm is, personally as thearne3 mentioned also if money was no object I'd have the 12, 25 and 45 setup but as it is my prime setup at the moment is looking at being 14,20,45 (or the 17 rather than 14 if I decided to keep!)

Unless you really need the speed, and at that price, I can't see why the 7-14mm or 9-18mm aren't a better buy for landscape work.... but only you can answer the question of which focal lengths you really need.

you can buy a nex+16mm (same FOV, same dof, same light gathering)
and still have $200 or so left over. that is a free nex!
unless you really need those little bit sharper corners and you really want to stay with m4/3.
i i think the oly's 12mm 2.0 makes very little sense, of course, for the price.

p.s.
one of these days i will shut up about the nex+16mm vs oly 12mm, i promise

If there's a way.... you should keep the 20 and then add a 12, 14, or 7-14. None of these lenses are a substitute for the 20 and vice versatile. if you can only afford one of them, then the 20 is probably the most likely candidate, with the 14 being a possible second. I have all of these lenses and they each fill a particular niche. None is quite a complete replacement for another. best you can do is assess your budget, think about the applications of most importance to you, and work toward gearing for that.

Thank you everyone for shedding some light for me. As most suggest it depends on FOV, I really didn't know what I was thinking... probably because the 12mm was so hypnotic, but you guys pulled me out of it. :-D

My main focus right now is landscape photography, and I already have a 7-14mm ultra wide lense, the reason I prefer prime is its sharpness and details. It's time for me to save up on these sets of prime lenses.

I've never even seen one, but by all accounts the 7-14mm is a pretty special lens in terms of sharpness and all around image quality so I can't really see what the 12mm would bring to the table for you apart from a lack of framing flexibility compared to the zoom....